Análisis de contenido de las declaraciones de testigosEvaluación de la validez científica y judicial de la hipótesis y la prueba forense

  1. RAMÓN ARCE 1
  1. 1 Universidade de Santiago de Compostela
    info

    Universidade de Santiago de Compostela

    Santiago de Compostela, España

    ROR https://ror.org/030eybx10

Journal:
Acción psicológica

ISSN: 1578-908X

Year of publication: 2017

Issue Title: Juridic Pyschology

Volume: 14

Issue: 2

Pages: 171-190

Type: Article

DOI: 10.5944/AP.14.2.21347 DIALNET GOOGLE SCHOLAR lock_openOpen access editor

More publications in: Acción psicológica

Sustainable development goals

Abstract

Assessing the credibility of a testimony is a crucial step in judicial decision-making, primarily when inconsistencies arise due to conflicting versions of events. The evaluation of the veracity of a testimony based on verbal cues, in particular those based on the Undeutsch hypothesis that contends that the memory of self-experienced real-life events differ in content and quality (as defined by reality criteria) from the memory of fabricated or fictitious accounts, is considered to be the most effective tool for assessing credibility. This hypothesis has given rise to a forensic technique known as Statement Validity Analysis (SRA) that includes a list of reality criteria i.e., Criteria Based Content Analysis (CBCA). Meta-analytical reviews support the discriminatory power of CBCA reality criteria and the CBCA total score in distinguishing between the memory of self-experienced real-life events versus fabricated or fictitious accounts in all types of populations (children and adults), witnesses (plaintiffs, witnesses, and defendants), and memories (sexual abuse, gender violence). A hypothesis must fulfil the Daubert standards for it to be admitted as scientific evidence in a court of law, as is the case of the Undeutsch hypothesis. Notwithstanding, the scientific evidence upholding this hypothesis in terms of reality criteria does not substantiate the validity of this forensic technique. A review of this technique revealed it failed to meet scientific criteria (CBCA is not a methodic system, and is neither valid nor reliable; and it lacks criterion validity as there is no strict objective decision criterion); and has legal and jurisprudential flaws (no safeguards guaranteeing the constitutional principle of the presumption of innocence; witness interviews to obtain statements may lack judicial validity; and fail to evaluate appropriately the consistency of the evidence). Finally, a forensic technique based on the content analysis of statements, the Global Evaluation System (GES), is examined in order to overcome the limitations of SVA.

Bibliographic References

  • Amado, B. G., Arce, R. y Fariña, F. (2015). Undeutsch hypothesis and Criteria Based Content Analysis: A Meta-Analytic Review. European Journal of Psychology Applied to Legal Context, 7, 3-12. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ejpal.2014.11.002
  • Amado, B. G., Arce, R., Fariña, F. y Vilariño, M. (2016). CBCA reality criteria in adults: A meta-analytic review. International Journal of Clinical and Health Psychology, 16, 201-210. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijchp.2016.01.002
  • Arce, R. (2015). Manifesto de rexeitamento da violencia de xénero. 25 de novembro 2015 [Manifesto of rejection of gender violence. November 25, 2015]. Recuperado de https://xornal.usc.es/xornal/opinions/opinion_0175.html
  • Arce, R. (2017, mayo). Criterios Daubert, científicos, jurisprudenciales, procesales y legales a aplicar a la prueba psicológica forense [Daubert Criteria, Scientific, Jurisprudential, Procedural, and Legal to Apply to the Forensic Psychological Test]. En Taller en el X Congreso Internacional de Psicología Jurídica y Forense, Sevilla, España.
  • Arce, R. y Fariña, F. (2013a). Evaluación psicológica-forense en casos de violencia de género: El Sistema de Evaluación Global (SEG). En S. P. Colín, E. García-López, y L. A. Morales (Coords.), Ecos de la violencia, voces de la reconstrucción (pp. 95-120). Morelia, Michoacán, México: Servicio de Publicaciones de la Universidad de Morelia. https://doi.org/10.13140/RG.2.1.1885.1040.
  • Arce, R. y Fariña, F. (2013b). Psicología forense experimental. Testigos y testimonio. Evaluación cognitiva de la veracidad de testimonios y declaraciones [Experimental Forensic Psychology. Witnesses and Testimony. Cognitive Evaluation of the Accuracy of Testimonies and Statements]. En S. Delgado (Dir. Tratado), y S. Delgado, y J. M. Maza (Coords., Vol. V), Tratado de Medicina Legal y Ciencias Forenses: Vol. V. Psiquiatría legal y forense (pp. 21-46). Barcelona, España: Bosch.
  • Arce, R. y Fariña, F. (2014). Práctica de la prueba psicológica-forense: El Sistema de Evaluación Global (SEG) [Practice of Forensic Psychological testing: The Global Assessment System (GAS)]. En C. Chan, C. Estrada, y F. J. Rodríguez (Eds.), aportaciones a la Psicología Jurídica y Forense desde Iberoamérica (pp. 47-61). México, DF: Manual Moderno.
  • Arce, R., Fariña, F., Carballal, A. y Novo, M. (2006). Evaluación del daño moral en accidentes de tráfico: Desarrollo y validación de un protocolo para la detección de la simulación [Evaluating Psychological Injury in Motor Vehicle Accidents (MVA): Development and Validation of a Protocol for Detecting Simulation]. Psicothema, 18, 278-283. Recuperado de http://www.psicothema.com/pdf/3210.pdf
  • Arce, R., Fariña, F., Carballal, A. y Novo, M. (2009). Creación y validación de un protocolo de evaluación forense de las secuelas psicológicas de la violencia de género [Creation and Validation of a Forensic Protocol to Assess Psychological Harm in Battered Women]. Psicothema, 21, 241-247. Recuperado de http://www.psicothema.es/pdf/3621.pdf
  • Arce, R., Fariña, F., Novo, M. y Vilariño, M. (2013). Contraste de la efectividad en la detección de declaraciones fabricadas de los criterios de validez del Sistema de Evaluación Global en casos de violencia contra la mujer [Contrast of effectiveness in detecting manufactured statements against the Global Assessment System's validity criteria in cases of violence against women]. En F. Expósito, I. Valor-Segura, M. Vilariño y A. Palmer (Eds.), Psicología Jurídica aplicada a los problemas sociales (pp. 153-161). Santiago de Compostela, España: Sociedad Española de Psicología Jurídica y Forense.
  • Arce, R., Fariña, F. y Vivero, A. (2007). Estudio exploratorio de la efectividad de las técnicas de análisis de contenido de las declaraciones en casos de violencia de género [Exploratory Study of the Effectiveness of the Techniques of Content Analysis of Declarations in Cases of Gender-Based Violence]. En C. Guillén y R. Guil (Coords.), Psicología social: Un encuentro de perspectivas (Vol. 1, pp. 590-604). Cádiz, España: Asociación de Profesionales de la Psicología Social.
  • Arce, R., Seijo, A. y Novo, M. (2010). Testimony Validity: A Comparative Study of Legal and Empirical Criteria. Psychology in Spain, 14, 1-7. Recuperado de http://www.psychologyinspain.com/content/full/2010/14010.pdf
  • Arntzen, F. (1970). Psychologier der Zeugenaussage [Psychology of Testimony]. Göttinger, Alemania: Hogrefe.
  • Bardin, L. (1996). El análisis de contenido [Content analysis] (2a. ed.). Madrid, España: Akal.
  • Boente, S. E. R. (2011). La prueba en los supuestos de violencia de género [Evidence in GBV Assumptions]. Revista Iberoamericana de Estudios Utilitaristas, XVIII(1-2), 231-246. Recuperado de http://www.usc.es/revistas/index.php/telos/article/download/1413/1656
  • Campbell, D. T. (1969). Reforms as Experiments. American Psychologist, 24(4), 409. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0027982
  • Daubert vs. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc., 113 S. Ct. 2786 (1993).
  • Dettenborn, H. Froehlich, H. y Szewczyk, H. (1984). Forensische Psychologie [Forensic Psychology]. Berlín, Alemania: Deutscher Verlag der Wissenschaften.
  • Fariña, F., Arce, R. y Novo, M. (2002). Heurístico de anclaje en las decisiones judiciales [Anchorage in Judicial Decision Making]. Psicothema, 14(1), 39-46. Recuperado de http://www.psicothema.com/pdf/684.pdf
  • Fariña, F., Arce, R. y Real, S. (1994). Ruedas de identificación: De la simulación y la realidad [Linepus: A Comparison of High-Fidelity Research and Research in a Real Context]. Psicothema, 6, 395-402. Recuperado de http://www.psicothema.es/pdf/935.pdf
  • Hans, V. P. y Vidmar, N. (1986). Judging the Jury. New York, NY: Plenum Press.
  • Horowitz, S. W., Lamb, M. E., Esplin, P. W., Boychuk, T. D., Krispin, O. y Reiter-Lavery, L. (1997). Reliability of Criteria-Based Content Analysis of Child Witness Statements. Legal and Criminological Psychology, 2, 11-21. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2044-8333.1997.tb00329.x
  • Johnson, M. K. y Raye, C. L. (1981). Reality Monitoring. Psychological Review, 88, 67-85. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.88.1.67
  • Köhnken, G. (2004). Statement Validity Analysis and the Detection of the Truth. En P. A. Granhag y L. A. Strömwall (Eds.), The detection of Deception in Forensic Contexts (pp. 41-63). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511490071.003
  • Köhnken, G., Milne, R., Memon, A. y Bull, R. (1999). The Cognitive Interview: A Meta-analysis. Psychology, Crime & Law, 5, 3-27. https://doi.org/10.1080/10683169908414991
  • Konecni, V. J. y Ebbesen, E. B. (1992). Methodological Issues on Legal Decision-Making, with Special Reference to Experimental Simulations. En F. Lösel, D. Bender y T. Bliesener (Eds.), Psychology and Law: International Perspectives (pp. 413-423). Berlín, Alemania: Walter de Gruyter.
  • Masip, J., Sporer, S. L., Garrido, E. y Herrero, C. (2005). The Detection of Deception with the Reality Monitoring Approach: A Review of the Empirical Evidence. Psychology, Crime & Law, 11, 99-122. https://doi.org/10.1080/10683160410001726356
  • Memon, A., Meissner, C. A. y Fraser, J. (2010). Cognitive interview. A Meta-Analytic Review and Study Space Analysis of the past 25 years. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 16, 340-372. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0020518
  • Memon, A., Wark, L., Bull, R. y Köhnken, G. (1997). Isolating the effects of the Cognitive Interview Techniques. British Journal of Psychology, 88(2), 179-198. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2044-8295.1997.tb02629.x
  • Ministerio de Justicia. (2005). Guía y manual de valoración integral forense de la violencia de género y doméstica. Madrid, España [Guide and Manual for the Comprehensive Forensic Assessment of Domestic and Gender-Based Violence]: Secretaría General Técnica del Ministerio de Justicia. Recuperado de http:// goo.gl/7dVRxN
  • Novo, M. y Seijo, D. (2010). Judicial Judgement-Making and Legal Criteria of Testimonial Credibility. European Journal of Psychology Applied to Legal Context, 2, 91-115. Recuperado de http://sepjf.webs.uvigo.es/index.php?option=com_docman&task=doc_download&gid=26&Itemid=110〈=en
  • Pearse, J. y Gudjonsson, G. H. (1996). Police Interviewing Techniques at Two South London Police Stations. Psychology, Crime and Law, 3, 63-74. https://doi.org/10.1080/10683169608409795
  • Popper, K. R. (1961). The Logic of Scientific Discovery (2a. ed.). New York, NY: Harper and Row.
  • Roma, P., San Martini, P., Sabatello, U., Tatarelli, R. y Ferracuti, S. (2011). Validity of Criteria-Based Content Analysis (CBCA) at trial in free-narrative interviews. Child Abuse & Neglect, 35, 613-620. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chiabu.2011.04.004
  • Sentencia 210/2014 del TS, Sala de lo Penal, de 14 de marzo de 2014. Recuperado de https://supremo.vlex.es/vid/abuso-sexual-victima-declaraciones-503438218
  • Sentencia 213/2002 del TS, Sala de lo Penal, 14 de febrero de 2002. Recuperado de http://supremo.vlex.es/vid/agresion-sexual-absolucion-fa-u-15055496
  • Sentencia 246/2016 de la AP de Las Palmas de Gran Canaria, Sala de lo Penal, de 28 de junio de 2016. Recuperado de https://www.iberley.es/jurisprudencia/sentencia-penal-n-246-2016-ap-palmas-sec-1-rec-62-2015-28-06-2016-47669530
  • Sentencia 7070/1988 del TS, Sala de lo Penal, de 28 de septiembre de 1988. Recuperado de http://lawcenter.es/w/file/download/64666
  • Sporer, S. L. (1997). The less travelled road to truth: Verbal cues in deception detection in accounts of fabricated and self-experienced events. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 11, 373-397. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1099-0720(199710)11:5<373::AID-ACP461>3.0.CO;2-0
  • Sporer, S. L. (2004). Reality monitoring and detection of deception. En A. Granhag y L. A. Strömwall (Eds.), The Detection of Deception in Forensic Contexts (pp. 64-102). Cambridge, UK. Cambridge University Press.
  • Steller, M. (1989). Recent Developments in Statement Analysis. En J. C. Yuille (Ed.), Credibility Assessment (pp. 135-154). Dordrecht, Holanda: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
  • Steller, M. y Böhm, C. (2006). 50 años de jurisprudencia del Tribunal Supremo alemán sobre psicología del testimonio. Balance y perspectiva [50 Years of German Supreme Court Case Law on Witness Psychology. Balance and Perspective]. En T. Fabian, C. Böhm y J. Romero (Eds.), Nuevos caminos y conceptos en la psicología jurídica (pp. 53-77). Berlín, Alemania: Lit Verlag.
  • Steller, M. y Köhnken, G. (1989). Criteria-Based Content Analysis. En D. C. Raskin (Ed.), Psychological methods in Criminal Investigation and Evidence (pp. 217-245). New York, NY: Springer-Verlag.
  • Sooniste, T., Granhag, P. A., Strömwall, L. A. y Vrij, A. (2015). Statements about True and False Intentions: Using the Cognitive Interview to Magnify the Differences. Scandinavian Journal of Psychology, 56(4), 371-378. https://doi.org/10.1111/sjop.12216
  • Steller, M. y Köhnken, G. (1989). Criteria-Based Content Analysis. En D. C. Raskin (Ed.), Psychological Methods in Criminal Investigation and Evidence (pp. 217-245). New York, NY: Springer-Verlag.
  • Szewczyk, H. (1973). Kriterien der beurteilung kindlicher zeugenaussagen [Criteria for Assessing the Validity of Child Declarations]. Probleme und Ergebnisse der Psychologie, 46, 46-66.
  • Undeutsch, U. (1967). Beurteilung der glaubhaftigkeit von zeugenaussagenn [Assessing the Credibility of Witnesses]. En U. Undeutsch (Ed.), Handbuch der psychologie, Vol. II: Forensische psychologie (pp. 26-181). Göttingen, Alemania: Verlag für Psychologie.
  • Undeutsch, U. (1989). The Development of Statement Reality Analysis. En J. Yuille (Ed.), Credibility Assessment (pp. 101-119). Dordrech, Holanda: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
  • Vilariño, M. (2010). ¿Es posible discriminar declaraciones reales de imaginadas y huella psíquica real de simulada en casos de violencia de género? [Is it Possible to Discriminate Real Statements from Imagined and Real Psychological Footprint of Simulated in Cases of Gender-Based Violence?] (Tesis doctoral, Universidade de Santiago de Compostela, España). Recuperado de http://goo.gl/rPD728
  • Vilariño, M., Novo, M. y Seijo, D. (2011). Estudio de la eficacia de las categorías de realidad del testimonio del Sistema de Evaluación Global (SEG) en casos de violencia de género [Study of the Effectiveness of the Reality Categories of Global Evaluation System (GAS) Testimony in Cases of Gender-Based Violence]. Revista Iberoamericana de Psicología y Salud, 2, 1-26. Recuperado de http://www.redalyc.org/pdf/2451/245116403001.pdf
  • Volbert, R. y Steller, M. (2014). Is this Testimony Truthful, Fabricated, or Based on False Memory? Credibility assessment 25 years after Steller and Köhnken (1989). European Psychologist, 19, 207-220. https://doi.org/10.1027/1016-9040/a000200
  • Vrij, A. (2000). Detecting Lies and Deceit. Chichester, UK: John Wiley and Sons.
  • Vrij, A. (2005). Criteria-based Content Analysis. A Qualitative Review of the First 37 Studies. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 11, 3-41. https://doi.org/10.1037/1076-8971.11.1.3
  • Vrij, A. (2008). Detecting Lies and Deceit: Pitfalls and Opportunities (2a. ed.). Chichester, UK: John Wiley and Sons.
  • Walsh, D. W. y Milne, R. (2008) Keeping the PEACE? An Analysis of the Taped Interview Performance of Benefit Fraud Investigators Within the DWP. Legal and Criminological Psychology, 13, 39-57. https://doi.org/10.1348/135532506X157179
  • Weick, K. E. (1985). Systematic Observational Methods. En G. Lindzey y E. Aronson (Eds.), The Handbook of Social Psychology (Vol. 1, pp. 567-634). Hillsdale, NJ: LEA.
  • Yuille, J.C., Hunter, R., Joffe, R. y Zaparniuk, J. (1993). Interviewing Children in Sexual Abuse Cases. En G. Goodman y B. Bottoms (Eds.), Child Victims, Child Witnesses: Understanding and Improving Children's Testimony (pp. 95-115). Nueva York, NY: Guilford Press
Data source: Dialnet